Radiology learning or teaching subject areas vs modalities: students’ perspective and experience at Albaha University

Figures & data

Table 1 Grading in the previous levels of the participating students in the present study

Grade	Group A	Group B
A	7	6
B	6	7
C	12	13
D	5	4
Total	30	30

Table 2 Subject areas and modalities used in teaching the radiology course that represent the two approaches

System	Subject areas (approach 1)	Modalities (approach 2)
GIT, pelvis, urinary system, and reproductive system	Abdominal trauma Acute abdominal pain Abdominal distension Change in bowel habits Colorectal cancer Different hepatic lesions including jaundice Obstruction and perforation Urinary retention Urinary tract infection Renal colic Gynecological emergencies and testicular lesions	Interpretation of abdominal X-ray Plain X-ray findings in different GIT lesions Interpretation of abdominal and pelvic U/S U/S findings in different abdominal and pelvic lesions Interpretation of abdominal and pelvic CT CT findings in different GIT lesions Interpretation of abdominal and pelvic MRI MRI findings in different GIT lesions Contrast, types, indications, and adverse effects Interpretation of contrast film in abdominal and pelvic lesions HSG, indications, and interpretation
Central nervous system	Head injury and stroke Intracranial hemorrhage Cord compression syndromes Altered consciousness levels Neck injury and backache Brain tumors CNS infection	Interpretation of head and neck X-ray Plain X-ray findings in different cranial and neck lesions Indications and interpretation of cranial U/S especially in neonates U/S findings in different cranial lesions Interpretation of cranial and neck CT CT findings in different cranial lesions Interpretation of MRI brain and neck MRI findings in different cranial and neck lesions Contrast, types, indications, and adverse effects Interpretation of contrast film in cranial lesions
Respiratory system and chest	Breathless and chest pain Chest infection and cough Congestive cardiac failure Thoracic trauma and pneumothorax Pleural and pulmonary tumors Hemoptysis and pulmonary embolism	Interpretation of chest X-ray Plain X-ray findings in different chest lesions Interpretation of chest CT CT findings in different pulmonary lesions Interpretation of chest MRI MRI findings in different pulmonary and pleural lesions
CVS	Aortic anomalies and diseases including valvular diseases Ischemic heart diseases Cardiothoracic problems in infancy and childhood including congenital heart disease	Interpretation of cardiac X-ray Plain X-ray findings in different cardiac lesions including valvular heart diseases Interpretation of cardiac CT CT findings in different cardiac lesions Interpretation of cardiac MRI MRI findings in different cardiac lesions Echo, indications, basic knowledge, angiogram, and Doppler U/S
MSK	Trauma and non-accidental injury MSK infections Congenital anomalies and metabolic bone diseases MSK tumors Chronic arthritis	Plain X-ray interpretation Plain X-ray findings in MSK lesions Interpretation of MSK CT CT findings in different MSK lesions Interpretation of MRI related to MSK MRI findings in different MSK lesions

Abbreviations: CNS, central nervous system; CT, computed tomography; CVS, cardiovascular system; GIT, gastrointestinal tract; HSG, hysterosalpingogram; MRI, magnetic resonance imaging; MSK, musculoskeletal; U/S, ultrasound; GIT, gastrointestinal; MSK, muscloskeletal system.

Table 3 Distribution of the student groups in relation to course days and approach type

Course days	Group A	Group B
1–10 days	Approach 1	Approach 2
11–20 days	Approach 2	Approach 1

Table 4 Likert scale questionnaire for measuring the degree of students’ satisfaction about both modalities used in teaching/learning the basic imaging course in the present study

Evaluation Domains	Strongly dissatisfied	Dissatisfied	Neutral	Satisfied	Strongly satisfied
1. Course organization and planning
The module identified learning objectives and method of grading	1	2	3	4	5
The content was matched with the stated course objectives	1	2	3	4	5
The content was arranged in a clear and orderly manner	1	2	3	4	5
2. Communication
The instructor explained the course material in a way that you could understand	1	2	3	4	5
The instructor showed enthusiasm for the subject matter	1	2	3	4	5
The instructor maintained a respectful and professional learning environment	1	2	3	4	5
You were encouraged to ask questions	1	2	3	4	5
You were given meaningful answers to your questions	1	2	3	4	5
The instructor was concerned with student learning	1	2	3	4	5
The instructor was available for course-related questions at office hours or by e-mail	1	2	3	4	5
3. Assignments/examinations and graded materials
The course’s assignments (readings, problem sets, essays, projects, reports, in-class exercises, etc.) helped you learn	1	2	3	4	5
Graded materials (examinations, quizzes, assignments, reports, projects, etc.) reflected what was taught in the course	1	2	3	4	5
The course’s assignments (readings, problem sets, essays, projects, reports, in-class exercises, etc.) helped you learn	1	2	3	4	5
4. Instructional methods
The instructor provided timely feedback on assignments	1	2	3	4	5
The instructor used teaching methods (discussion, lecture, demonstration, etc.) that enhanced your learning	1	2	3	4	5
The instructor made appropriate and effective use of technology	1	2	3	4	5
The instructor used class time effectively	1	2	3	4	5
5. Course outcomes
You learned the key concepts you studied in this course	1	2	3	4	5
You learned the normal and abnormal radiological findings under one subject area using different modalities in a sequential manner	1	2	3	4	5
You learned the normal and abnormal radiological findings under one imaging modality with different subjects arranged in a sequential manner	1	2	3	4	5
You use one imaging modality to subject area to understand and report	1	2	3	4	5
You learned the imaging interpretation through collection of multiple subjects under one imaging modality	1	2	3	4	5
You learned the radiological interpretation by understanding the DD of subject applied	1	2	3	4	5
You learned the radiological interpretation by understanding the lesions through sequences of imaging modalities	1	2	3	4	5
Most subject areas need more imaging modalities to understand, analyze, compare, and report at the same time of learning	1	2	3	4	5
You can select the most common and noninvasive modality to understand and report most of the subject areas in the course content	1	2	3	4	5
Using different modalities in the same setting for one subject area is of great importance to understand	1	2	3	4	5
Using different subjects in the same setting for one imaging modality is of great importance to understand	1	2	3	4	5
You used high-level thinking in this course (eg, analyzing ideas, synthesizing ideas, making judgments about information, and applying information to new situations)	1	2	3	4	5
Your perspective expanded (eg, intellectually, culturally, and artistically) about the materials you studied in this course	1	2	3	4	5
Your interest in this subject has increased as a result of this course	1	2	3	4	5
6. Course workload
You put effort into learning the materials covered in this course	1	2	3	4	5
You were challenged to do your best work in this course	1	2	3	4	5

Abbreviation: DD, differential diagnosis.

Figure 1 Results of the two models representing the outcome of both integration approaches.

Table 5 The results of two models of questions representing the two approaches

Model	A+	A	B+	B	C+	C	D+	D	F	Independent t-test
1	1 (1.6%)	4 (6.6%)	5 (8.3%)	7 (11.6%)	10 (16.6%)	14 (23.3%)	12 (20%)	5 (8.3%)	2 (3.3%)	P-value is 0.00001, and it is highly significant at P≤0.05
2	4 (6.6%)	8 (13.2%)	12 (20%)	17 (28%)	5 (8.3%)	7 (11.6%)	5 (8.3%)	1 (1.6%)	1 (1.6%)

Figure 2 Students’ satisfaction about both integration approaches.

Abbreviations: DS, dissatisfied; S, satisfied.

Table 6 The results of the Likert scale about the students’ satisfaction against both integration approaches in the basic imaging module

Approach	Strongly dissatisfied	Satisfied	Neutral	Satisfied	Strongly satisfied	t–test
1	8 (13.3%)	7 (11.6%)	7 (11.6%)	22 (36.6%)	16 (26.6%)	P-value is 0.0001, and it is significant at P≤0.05
2	4 (6.6%)	8 (13.3%)	3 (5%)	18 (30%)	27 (45%)

Figure 3 Peers’ satisfaction regarding both integration approaches.

Abbreviations: DS, dissatisfied; S, satisfied.

Table 7 The results of the Likert scale about the satisfaction of peers against both integration approaches in the basic imaging module

Approach	Strongly dissatisfied	Satisfied	Neutral	Satisfied	Strongly satisfied	t-test
1	3 (20%)	4 (26.6%)	1 (6.6%)	4 (26.6%)	3 (20%)	P-value is 0.0004, and it is significant at P≤0.05
2	1 (6.6%)	3 (20%)	1 (6.6%)	3 (20%)	7 (46.6%)